I’m excited about the course. I expect to learn how to use R. Reijo Sund told me about the course. https://github.com/elmeris/IODS-project # About the project

Write a short description about the course and add a link to your GitHub repository here. This is an R Markdown (.Rmd) file so you can use R Markdown syntax.

Exercise2: Analysis

Code for data wrangling: https://github.com/elmeris/IODS-project/blob/master/data/create_learning2014.R

reading data

learning2014 <- read.csv("~/IODS-project/data/learning2014.csv")
str(learning2014)
## 'data.frame':    166 obs. of  7 variables:
##  $ gender  : Factor w/ 2 levels "F","M": 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 ...
##  $ age     : int  53 55 49 53 49 38 50 37 37 42 ...
##  $ attitude: num  3.7 3.1 2.5 3.5 3.7 3.8 3.5 2.9 3.8 2.1 ...
##  $ deep    : num  3.58 2.92 3.5 3.5 3.67 ...
##  $ stra    : num  3.38 2.75 3.62 3.12 3.62 ...
##  $ surf    : num  2.58 3.17 2.25 2.25 2.83 ...
##  $ points  : int  25 12 24 10 22 21 21 31 24 26 ...
head(learning2014)
##   gender age attitude     deep  stra     surf points
## 1      F  53      3.7 3.583333 3.375 2.583333     25
## 2      M  55      3.1 2.916667 2.750 3.166667     12
## 3      F  49      2.5 3.500000 3.625 2.250000     24
## 4      M  53      3.5 3.500000 3.125 2.250000     10
## 5      M  49      3.7 3.666667 3.625 2.833333     22
## 6      F  38      3.8 4.750000 3.625 2.416667     21
dim(learning2014)
## [1] 166   7

There is seven variables and 166 observations.

Graphical overview

# access the GGally and ggplot2 libraries
library(GGally)
library(ggplot2)

# create a more advanced plot matrix with ggpairs()
p <- ggpairs(learning2014, mapping = aes(col = gender, alpha = 0.3), lower = list(combo = wrap("facethist", bins = 20)))

# draw the plot
p

Highest correlation is between points and attitude. All distributions looks even but age is converted to the right.

Regression model

The explanatory variables are “surface”, “attitude” and “strategy”

Scatter plot

qplot(attitude, points, data = learning2014) + geom_smooth(method = "lm")

a linear model

model <- lm(points ~1, data = learning2014)

Summary of the model

summary(model)
## 
## Call:
## lm(formula = points ~ 1, data = learning2014)
## 
## Residuals:
##      Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max 
## -15.7169  -3.7169   0.2831   5.0331  10.2831 
## 
## Coefficients:
##             Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
## (Intercept)  22.7169     0.4575   49.65   <2e-16 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## Residual standard error: 5.895 on 165 degrees of freedom

Regression model with multiple explanatory variables

my_model2 <- lm(points ~ attitude + stra + surf, data = learning2014)

Summary of the model2

summary(my_model2)
## 
## Call:
## lm(formula = points ~ attitude + stra + surf, data = learning2014)
## 
## Residuals:
##      Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max 
## -17.1550  -3.4346   0.5156   3.6401  10.8952 
## 
## Coefficients:
##             Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
## (Intercept)  11.0171     3.6837   2.991  0.00322 ** 
## attitude      3.3952     0.5741   5.913 1.93e-08 ***
## stra          0.8531     0.5416   1.575  0.11716    
## surf         -0.5861     0.8014  -0.731  0.46563    
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## Residual standard error: 5.296 on 162 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:  0.2074, Adjusted R-squared:  0.1927 
## F-statistic: 14.13 on 3 and 162 DF,  p-value: 3.156e-08

Lets move surf out because the p-vaöue is the highest.

New model

my_model3 <- lm(points ~ attitude + stra, data = learning2014)

summary

summary(my_model3)
## 
## Call:
## lm(formula = points ~ attitude + stra, data = learning2014)
## 
## Residuals:
##      Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max 
## -17.6436  -3.3113   0.5575   3.7928  10.9295 
## 
## Coefficients:
##             Estimate Std. Error t value Pr(>|t|)    
## (Intercept)   8.9729     2.3959   3.745  0.00025 ***
## attitude      3.4658     0.5652   6.132 6.31e-09 ***
## stra          0.9137     0.5345   1.709  0.08927 .  
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## Residual standard error: 5.289 on 163 degrees of freedom
## Multiple R-squared:  0.2048, Adjusted R-squared:  0.1951 
## F-statistic: 20.99 on 2 and 163 DF,  p-value: 7.734e-09

Attitude is significant variable. Strategy is not statistically significant. R-squared:the higher the R-squared, the better the model fits your data. R-squared is always between 0 and 100%. Multiple R-squared: 0.2048. Means the model fits the data quite well.

Diagnostic plot

par(mfrow = c(2,2))
plot(my_model3, which = c(1,2,5))

QQ plot: model is normally distributed

Exercise3: Analysis

Data wrangling I read the data from URL web page, joined the two data sets using the variables “school”, “sex”, “age”, “address”, “famsize”, “Pstatus”, “Medu”, “Fedu”, “Mjob”, “Fjob”, “reason”, “nursery”,“internet” as (student) identifiers. I Kept only the students present in both data sets. Then, I took the average of the answers related to weekday and weekend alcohol consumption to create a new column ‘alc_use’ to the joined data. Then I used ‘alc_use’ to create a new logical column ‘high_use’ which is TRUE for students for which ‘alc_use’ is greater than 2 (the range is: from 1 - very low to 5 - very high).

Code for data wrangling: https://github.com/elmeris/IODS-project/blob/master/data/create_alc.R

Reading data

alc <- read.csv("~/IODS-project/data/alc.csv")
head(alc)
##   school sex age address famsize Pstatus Medu Fedu     Mjob     Fjob
## 1     GP   F  18       U     GT3       A    4    4  at_home  teacher
## 2     GP   F  17       U     GT3       T    1    1  at_home    other
## 3     GP   F  15       U     LE3       T    1    1  at_home    other
## 4     GP   F  15       U     GT3       T    4    2   health services
## 5     GP   F  16       U     GT3       T    3    3    other    other
## 6     GP   M  16       U     LE3       T    4    3 services    other
##       reason nursery internet guardian traveltime studytime failures
## 1     course     yes       no   mother          2         2        0
## 2     course      no      yes   father          1         2        0
## 3      other     yes      yes   mother          1         2        2
## 4       home     yes      yes   mother          1         3        0
## 5       home     yes       no   father          1         2        0
## 6 reputation     yes      yes   mother          1         2        0
##   schoolsup famsup paid activities higher romantic famrel freetime goout
## 1       yes     no   no         no    yes       no      4        3     4
## 2        no    yes   no         no    yes       no      5        3     3
## 3       yes     no  yes         no    yes       no      4        3     2
## 4        no    yes  yes        yes    yes      yes      3        2     2
## 5        no    yes  yes         no    yes       no      4        3     2
## 6        no    yes  yes        yes    yes       no      5        4     2
##   Dalc Walc health absences G1 G2 G3 alc_use high_use
## 1    1    1      3        5  2  8  8     1.0    FALSE
## 2    1    1      3        3  7  8  8     1.0    FALSE
## 3    2    3      3        8 10 10 11     2.5     TRUE
## 4    1    1      5        1 14 14 14     1.0    FALSE
## 5    1    2      5        2  8 12 12     1.5    FALSE
## 6    1    2      5        8 14 14 14     1.5    FALSE
colnames(alc)
##  [1] "school"     "sex"        "age"        "address"    "famsize"   
##  [6] "Pstatus"    "Medu"       "Fedu"       "Mjob"       "Fjob"      
## [11] "reason"     "nursery"    "internet"   "guardian"   "traveltime"
## [16] "studytime"  "failures"   "schoolsup"  "famsup"     "paid"      
## [21] "activities" "higher"     "romantic"   "famrel"     "freetime"  
## [26] "goout"      "Dalc"       "Walc"       "health"     "absences"  
## [31] "G1"         "G2"         "G3"         "alc_use"    "high_use"

Description of the data This data has 385 observations for 35 variables. This combined data is from two different schools and it is about 15-22 year old students success in mathematics and portuguese language. S The survey included the following variables: student’s school, student’s sex, student’s age, student’s home address, family size, parent’s cohabitation status, mother’s education, father’s education, mother’s job, father’s job, reason to choose this school, student’s guardian, home to school travel time, weekly study time, number of past class failures, extra educational support, family educational support, extra paid classes within the course subject (Math or Portuguese), extra-curricular activities, attended nursery school, wants to take higher education, Internet access at home, a romantic relationship, quality of family relationships, free time after school, going out with friends, workday alcohol consumption, weekend alcohol consumption, current health status, number of school absences and grades in the course subject, Math or Portuguese: first period grade, second period grade and final grade.

My analysis from data

I am interested in the relationships between high/low alcohol consumption and these four variables: student’s sex (male or female), number of school absences (numeric: from 0 to 93), final grade (numeric: from 0 to 20, output target), age - student’s age (numeric: from 15 to 22).

My hypotesis are: 1) Men consume more alcohol 2) Students with lower grades consume more alcohol 3) Students with more absences consume more alcohol 4) Older students consume more alcohol

Lets find out!

library(tidyr); library(dplyr); library(ggplot2)
## 
## Attaching package: 'dplyr'
## The following object is masked from 'package:GGally':
## 
##     nasa
## The following objects are masked from 'package:stats':
## 
##     filter, lag
## The following objects are masked from 'package:base':
## 
##     intersect, setdiff, setequal, union
glimpse(alc) 
## Observations: 382
## Variables: 35
## $ school     <fct> GP, GP, GP, GP, GP, GP, GP, GP, GP, GP, GP, GP, GP, G…
## $ sex        <fct> F, F, F, F, F, M, M, F, M, M, F, F, M, M, M, F, F, F,…
## $ age        <int> 18, 17, 15, 15, 16, 16, 16, 17, 15, 15, 15, 15, 15, 1…
## $ address    <fct> U, U, U, U, U, U, U, U, U, U, U, U, U, U, U, U, U, U,…
## $ famsize    <fct> GT3, GT3, LE3, GT3, GT3, LE3, LE3, GT3, LE3, GT3, GT3…
## $ Pstatus    <fct> A, T, T, T, T, T, T, A, A, T, T, T, T, T, A, T, T, T,…
## $ Medu       <int> 4, 1, 1, 4, 3, 4, 2, 4, 3, 3, 4, 2, 4, 4, 2, 4, 4, 3,…
## $ Fedu       <int> 4, 1, 1, 2, 3, 3, 2, 4, 2, 4, 4, 1, 4, 3, 2, 4, 4, 3,…
## $ Mjob       <fct> at_home, at_home, at_home, health, other, services, o…
## $ Fjob       <fct> teacher, other, other, services, other, other, other,…
## $ reason     <fct> course, course, other, home, home, reputation, home, …
## $ nursery    <fct> yes, no, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes,…
## $ internet   <fct> no, yes, yes, yes, no, yes, yes, no, yes, yes, yes, y…
## $ guardian   <fct> mother, father, mother, mother, father, mother, mothe…
## $ traveltime <int> 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 3, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 3,…
## $ studytime  <int> 2, 2, 2, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 2, 3, 1, 2, 3, 1, 3, 2,…
## $ failures   <int> 0, 0, 2, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, 0,…
## $ schoolsup  <fct> yes, no, yes, no, no, no, no, yes, no, no, no, no, no…
## $ famsup     <fct> no, yes, no, yes, yes, yes, no, yes, yes, yes, yes, y…
## $ paid       <fct> no, no, yes, yes, yes, yes, no, no, yes, yes, yes, no…
## $ activities <fct> no, no, no, yes, no, yes, no, no, no, yes, no, yes, y…
## $ higher     <fct> yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes…
## $ romantic   <fct> no, no, no, yes, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, …
## $ famrel     <int> 4, 5, 4, 3, 4, 5, 4, 4, 4, 5, 3, 5, 4, 5, 4, 4, 3, 5,…
## $ freetime   <int> 3, 3, 3, 2, 3, 4, 4, 1, 2, 5, 3, 2, 3, 4, 5, 4, 2, 3,…
## $ goout      <int> 4, 3, 2, 2, 2, 2, 4, 4, 2, 1, 3, 2, 3, 3, 2, 4, 3, 2,…
## $ Dalc       <int> 1, 1, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1, 1,…
## $ Walc       <int> 1, 1, 3, 1, 2, 2, 1, 1, 1, 1, 2, 1, 3, 2, 1, 2, 2, 1,…
## $ health     <int> 3, 3, 3, 5, 5, 5, 3, 1, 1, 5, 2, 4, 5, 3, 3, 2, 2, 4,…
## $ absences   <int> 5, 3, 8, 1, 2, 8, 0, 4, 0, 0, 1, 2, 1, 1, 0, 5, 8, 3,…
## $ G1         <int> 2, 7, 10, 14, 8, 14, 12, 8, 16, 13, 12, 10, 13, 11, 1…
## $ G2         <int> 8, 8, 10, 14, 12, 14, 12, 9, 17, 14, 11, 12, 14, 11, …
## $ G3         <int> 8, 8, 11, 14, 12, 14, 12, 10, 18, 14, 12, 12, 13, 12,…
## $ alc_use    <dbl> 1.0, 1.0, 2.5, 1.0, 1.5, 1.5, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.0, 1.5…
## $ high_use   <lgl> FALSE, FALSE, TRUE, FALSE, FALSE, FALSE, FALSE, FALSE…
gather(alc) %>% glimpse
## Warning: attributes are not identical across measure variables;
## they will be dropped
## Observations: 13,370
## Variables: 2
## $ key   <chr> "school", "school", "school", "school", "school", "school"…
## $ value <chr> "GP", "GP", "GP", "GP", "GP", "GP", "GP", "GP", "GP", "GP"…
gather(alc) %>% ggplot(aes(value)) + facet_wrap("key", scales = "free") + geom_bar()
## Warning: attributes are not identical across measure variables;
## they will be dropped

library(dplyr); library(ggplot2)
alc %>% group_by(sex, high_use) %>% summarise(count = n(), mean_grade = mean(G3))
## # A tibble: 4 x 4
## # Groups:   sex [2]
##   sex   high_use count mean_grade
##   <fct> <lgl>    <int>      <dbl>
## 1 F     FALSE      156       11.4
## 2 F     TRUE        42       11.7
## 3 M     FALSE      112       12.2
## 4 M     TRUE        72       10.3

As we can see in the table above that it seems that my first hypothesis was maybe right because men consume more alcohol than women. Yet I dont know is this difference statistically significant or not.

g1 <- ggplot(alc, aes(x = high_use, y = G3, col = sex))
g1 + geom_boxplot() + ylab("grade")

As the boxplot above shows the students with lower final grade consume more alcohol. This means my second hypothesis was maybe right. Yet I dont know is this difference statistically significant or not.

g2 <- ggplot(alc, aes(x = high_use, y = absences, col = sex))
g2 + geom_boxplot() + ggtitle("Student absences by alcohol consumption and sex")

As the boxplot above shows the students with more absences consume more alcohol. This means my third hypothesis was maybe right. Yet I dont know is this difference statistically significant or not.

g3 <- ggplot(alc, aes(x = high_use, y = age, col = sex))
g3 + geom_boxplot() + ggtitle("Student age by alcohol consumption and sex")

As the boxplot above shows the older male students and younger female students consume more alcohol. This means my second hypothesis was maybe right with male students but not with female students. Yet I dont know is this difference statistically significant or not.

m <- glm(high_use ~ age + G3 + absences + sex, data = alc, family = "binomial")
summary(m)
## 
## Call:
## glm(formula = high_use ~ age + G3 + absences + sex, family = "binomial", 
##     data = alc)
## 
## Deviance Residuals: 
##     Min       1Q   Median       3Q      Max  
## -2.2729  -0.8326  -0.6292   1.0442   2.1190  
## 
## Coefficients:
##             Estimate Std. Error z value Pr(>|z|)    
## (Intercept) -3.38339    1.84796  -1.831 0.067120 .  
## age          0.13985    0.10328   1.354 0.175690    
## G3          -0.06631    0.03624  -1.830 0.067277 .  
## absences     0.08964    0.02309   3.882 0.000104 ***
## sexM         0.98580    0.24184   4.076 4.58e-05 ***
## ---
## Signif. codes:  0 '***' 0.001 '**' 0.01 '*' 0.05 '.' 0.1 ' ' 1
## 
## (Dispersion parameter for binomial family taken to be 1)
## 
##     Null deviance: 465.68  on 381  degrees of freedom
## Residual deviance: 423.66  on 377  degrees of freedom
## AIC: 433.66
## 
## Number of Fisher Scoring iterations: 4
coef(m)
## (Intercept)         age          G3    absences        sexM 
## -3.38338833  0.13985344 -0.06630516  0.08963638  0.98580237
m <- glm(high_use ~ age + G3 + absences + sex, data = alc, family = "binomial")
OR <- coef(m) %>% exp
CI <- confint(m) %>% exp
## Waiting for profiling to be done...
cbind(OR, CI)
##                     OR        2.5 %   97.5 %
## (Intercept) 0.03393229 0.0008683319 1.237502
## age         1.15010522 0.9401979286 1.410759
## G3          0.93584524 0.8710385897 1.004426
## absences    1.09377649 1.0474354900 1.146836
## sexM        2.67996134 1.6781593816 4.338864

The fitted logistic regression model demonstrate that two of my chosen variables: absences and sex are statistically significant in relation to alcohol consumption. These variables have a p-value of <0.001.

The two other variables: age and final grade did not show statistical significance in relation to alcohol consumption.

Let’s take a closer look at statistically significant variables. Absences: Odds ratio shows us that the odds of higher alcohol consumption increases 1.08 times when the number of absences increase one unit. (95% Cl 1.05-1.15)

Sex: Odds ratio shows us that the male students have higher alcohol consumption 2.7 times more likely than female students. (95% Cl 1.68-4.34)

Prediction of the probability of high_use

probabilities <- predict(m, type = "response")
alc <- mutate(alc, probability = probabilities)
alc <- mutate(alc, prediction = probability > 0.5)
table(high_use = alc$high_use, prediction = alc$prediction)
##         prediction
## high_use FALSE TRUE
##    FALSE   255   13
##    TRUE     84   30
table(high_use = alc$high_use, prediction = alc$prediction) %>% prop.table %>% addmargins
##         prediction
## high_use      FALSE       TRUE        Sum
##    FALSE 0.66753927 0.03403141 0.70157068
##    TRUE  0.21989529 0.07853403 0.29842932
##    Sum   0.88743455 0.11256545 1.00000000

These tables shows us that in 339 false (low alcohol use) predictions 255 were really false, thats about 75%, and in 43 true (high alcohol use) predictions 30 were really true, thats about 70%.

Visualizing the prediction of the probability of high_use

library(dplyr); library(ggplot2)
g <- ggplot(alc, aes(x = probability, y = high_use, col = prediction))
g + geom_point()

This plot shows us that the prediction of correct classification is quite good, but there is some misclassifications with this model.

Exercise 4 / Clustering and classification: Analysis

Task 1

1.1 strarting

I created a new RMarkdown file and saved it as an empty file named ‘chapter4.Rmd’. Then I included the file as a child file in my ‘index.Rmd’ file.

This week I used the Boston Housing Dataset for the exercise

Task 2

2.1 Loading and exploring the structure and the dimensions of the data

## 
## Attaching package: 'MASS'
## The following object is masked from 'package:dplyr':
## 
##     select
## 'data.frame':    506 obs. of  14 variables:
##  $ crim   : num  0.00632 0.02731 0.02729 0.03237 0.06905 ...
##  $ zn     : num  18 0 0 0 0 0 12.5 12.5 12.5 12.5 ...
##  $ indus  : num  2.31 7.07 7.07 2.18 2.18 2.18 7.87 7.87 7.87 7.87 ...
##  $ chas   : int  0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ...
##  $ nox    : num  0.538 0.469 0.469 0.458 0.458 0.458 0.524 0.524 0.524 0.524 ...
##  $ rm     : num  6.58 6.42 7.18 7 7.15 ...
##  $ age    : num  65.2 78.9 61.1 45.8 54.2 58.7 66.6 96.1 100 85.9 ...
##  $ dis    : num  4.09 4.97 4.97 6.06 6.06 ...
##  $ rad    : int  1 2 2 3 3 3 5 5 5 5 ...
##  $ tax    : num  296 242 242 222 222 222 311 311 311 311 ...
##  $ ptratio: num  15.3 17.8 17.8 18.7 18.7 18.7 15.2 15.2 15.2 15.2 ...
##  $ black  : num  397 397 393 395 397 ...
##  $ lstat  : num  4.98 9.14 4.03 2.94 5.33 ...
##  $ medv   : num  24 21.6 34.7 33.4 36.2 28.7 22.9 27.1 16.5 18.9 ...
## [1] 506  14
##  [1] "crim"    "zn"      "indus"   "chas"    "nox"     "rm"      "age"    
##  [8] "dis"     "rad"     "tax"     "ptratio" "black"   "lstat"   "medv"

Description The Boston Housing Dataset is a derived from information collected by the U.S. Census Service concerning housing in the area of Boston MA. The Boston data frame has 506 rows and 14 columns. The following describes the dataset columns:

VARIABLE DESCRIPTION
"CRIM" per capita crime rate by town
"ZN" proportion of residential land zoned for lots over 25,000 sq.ft.
"INDUS" proportion of non-retail business acres per town.
"CHAS" Charles River dummy variable (1 if tract bounds river; 0 otherwise)
"NOX" nitric oxides concentration (parts per 10 million)
"RM" average number of rooms per dwelling
"AGE" proportion of owner-occupied units built prior to 1940
"DIS" weighted distances to five Boston employment centres
"RAD" index of accessibility to radial highways
"TAX" full-value property-tax rate per $10,000
"PTRATIO" upil-teacher ratio by town
"B - 1000(Bk - 0.63)^2" where Bk is the proportion of blacks by town
"LSTAT" % lower status of the population
"MEDV" Median value of owner-occupied homes in $1000’s

Task 3

3.1 Graphical overview of the data and summaries of the variables in the data

##       crim                zn             indus            chas        
##  Min.   : 0.00632   Min.   :  0.00   Min.   : 0.46   Min.   :0.00000  
##  1st Qu.: 0.08204   1st Qu.:  0.00   1st Qu.: 5.19   1st Qu.:0.00000  
##  Median : 0.25651   Median :  0.00   Median : 9.69   Median :0.00000  
##  Mean   : 3.61352   Mean   : 11.36   Mean   :11.14   Mean   :0.06917  
##  3rd Qu.: 3.67708   3rd Qu.: 12.50   3rd Qu.:18.10   3rd Qu.:0.00000  
##  Max.   :88.97620   Max.   :100.00   Max.   :27.74   Max.   :1.00000  
##       nox               rm             age              dis        
##  Min.   :0.3850   Min.   :3.561   Min.   :  2.90   Min.   : 1.130  
##  1st Qu.:0.4490   1st Qu.:5.886   1st Qu.: 45.02   1st Qu.: 2.100  
##  Median :0.5380   Median :6.208   Median : 77.50   Median : 3.207  
##  Mean   :0.5547   Mean   :6.285   Mean   : 68.57   Mean   : 3.795  
##  3rd Qu.:0.6240   3rd Qu.:6.623   3rd Qu.: 94.08   3rd Qu.: 5.188  
##  Max.   :0.8710   Max.   :8.780   Max.   :100.00   Max.   :12.127  
##       rad              tax           ptratio          black       
##  Min.   : 1.000   Min.   :187.0   Min.   :12.60   Min.   :  0.32  
##  1st Qu.: 4.000   1st Qu.:279.0   1st Qu.:17.40   1st Qu.:375.38  
##  Median : 5.000   Median :330.0   Median :19.05   Median :391.44  
##  Mean   : 9.549   Mean   :408.2   Mean   :18.46   Mean   :356.67  
##  3rd Qu.:24.000   3rd Qu.:666.0   3rd Qu.:20.20   3rd Qu.:396.23  
##  Max.   :24.000   Max.   :711.0   Max.   :22.00   Max.   :396.90  
##      lstat            medv      
##  Min.   : 1.73   Min.   : 5.00  
##  1st Qu.: 6.95   1st Qu.:17.02  
##  Median :11.36   Median :21.20  
##  Mean   :12.65   Mean   :22.53  
##  3rd Qu.:16.95   3rd Qu.:25.00  
##  Max.   :37.97   Max.   :50.00
##          crim    zn indus  chas   nox    rm   age   dis   rad   tax
## crim     1.00 -0.20  0.41 -0.06  0.42 -0.22  0.35 -0.38  0.63  0.58
## zn      -0.20  1.00 -0.53 -0.04 -0.52  0.31 -0.57  0.66 -0.31 -0.31
## indus    0.41 -0.53  1.00  0.06  0.76 -0.39  0.64 -0.71  0.60  0.72
## chas    -0.06 -0.04  0.06  1.00  0.09  0.09  0.09 -0.10 -0.01 -0.04
## nox      0.42 -0.52  0.76  0.09  1.00 -0.30  0.73 -0.77  0.61  0.67
## rm      -0.22  0.31 -0.39  0.09 -0.30  1.00 -0.24  0.21 -0.21 -0.29
## age      0.35 -0.57  0.64  0.09  0.73 -0.24  1.00 -0.75  0.46  0.51
## dis     -0.38  0.66 -0.71 -0.10 -0.77  0.21 -0.75  1.00 -0.49 -0.53
## rad      0.63 -0.31  0.60 -0.01  0.61 -0.21  0.46 -0.49  1.00  0.91
## tax      0.58 -0.31  0.72 -0.04  0.67 -0.29  0.51 -0.53  0.91  1.00
## ptratio  0.29 -0.39  0.38 -0.12  0.19 -0.36  0.26 -0.23  0.46  0.46
## black   -0.39  0.18 -0.36  0.05 -0.38  0.13 -0.27  0.29 -0.44 -0.44
## lstat    0.46 -0.41  0.60 -0.05  0.59 -0.61  0.60 -0.50  0.49  0.54
## medv    -0.39  0.36 -0.48  0.18 -0.43  0.70 -0.38  0.25 -0.38 -0.47
##         ptratio black lstat  medv
## crim       0.29 -0.39  0.46 -0.39
## zn        -0.39  0.18 -0.41  0.36
## indus      0.38 -0.36  0.60 -0.48
## chas      -0.12  0.05 -0.05  0.18
## nox        0.19 -0.38  0.59 -0.43
## rm        -0.36  0.13 -0.61  0.70
## age        0.26 -0.27  0.60 -0.38
## dis       -0.23  0.29 -0.50  0.25
## rad        0.46 -0.44  0.49 -0.38
## tax        0.46 -0.44  0.54 -0.47
## ptratio    1.00 -0.18  0.37 -0.51
## black     -0.18  1.00 -0.37  0.33
## lstat      0.37 -0.37  1.00 -0.74
## medv      -0.51  0.33 -0.74  1.00
## corrplot 0.84 loaded

Description The graphical overview: First graph gives us some info about which combination of varibles produces some kind of clusters. For example rad ageseems to produse some clusters.

The graphical display of a correlation matrix shows us the correlation between pairs of variables. For exemple the correlation between variables tax and rad is high.

Summaries of thevariables The summary shows the minimum and maximum values, quarters, and mean for each variable. For example for the variable the mean value is 0.5547.

Task 4

4.1 Standardizing the dataset and printing out summaries of the scaled data.

##       crim                 zn               indus        
##  Min.   :-0.419367   Min.   :-0.48724   Min.   :-1.5563  
##  1st Qu.:-0.410563   1st Qu.:-0.48724   1st Qu.:-0.8668  
##  Median :-0.390280   Median :-0.48724   Median :-0.2109  
##  Mean   : 0.000000   Mean   : 0.00000   Mean   : 0.0000  
##  3rd Qu.: 0.007389   3rd Qu.: 0.04872   3rd Qu.: 1.0150  
##  Max.   : 9.924110   Max.   : 3.80047   Max.   : 2.4202  
##       chas              nox                rm               age         
##  Min.   :-0.2723   Min.   :-1.4644   Min.   :-3.8764   Min.   :-2.3331  
##  1st Qu.:-0.2723   1st Qu.:-0.9121   1st Qu.:-0.5681   1st Qu.:-0.8366  
##  Median :-0.2723   Median :-0.1441   Median :-0.1084   Median : 0.3171  
##  Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000  
##  3rd Qu.:-0.2723   3rd Qu.: 0.5981   3rd Qu.: 0.4823   3rd Qu.: 0.9059  
##  Max.   : 3.6648   Max.   : 2.7296   Max.   : 3.5515   Max.   : 1.1164  
##       dis               rad               tax             ptratio       
##  Min.   :-1.2658   Min.   :-0.9819   Min.   :-1.3127   Min.   :-2.7047  
##  1st Qu.:-0.8049   1st Qu.:-0.6373   1st Qu.:-0.7668   1st Qu.:-0.4876  
##  Median :-0.2790   Median :-0.5225   Median :-0.4642   Median : 0.2746  
##  Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000  
##  3rd Qu.: 0.6617   3rd Qu.: 1.6596   3rd Qu.: 1.5294   3rd Qu.: 0.8058  
##  Max.   : 3.9566   Max.   : 1.6596   Max.   : 1.7964   Max.   : 1.6372  
##      black             lstat              medv        
##  Min.   :-3.9033   Min.   :-1.5296   Min.   :-1.9063  
##  1st Qu.: 0.2049   1st Qu.:-0.7986   1st Qu.:-0.5989  
##  Median : 0.3808   Median :-0.1811   Median :-0.1449  
##  Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000  
##  3rd Qu.: 0.4332   3rd Qu.: 0.6024   3rd Qu.: 0.2683  
##  Max.   : 0.4406   Max.   : 3.5453   Max.   : 2.9865
## [1] "matrix"

Description After standardization, the mean of all variables is zero. Also the minimum, maximum, and quarters values have changed.

4.2 Creating a categorical variable of the crime rate and dropping the old crime rate variable from the dataset.

##           0%          25%          50%          75%         100% 
## -0.419366929 -0.410563278 -0.390280295  0.007389247  9.924109610
## crime
##      low  med_low med_high     high 
##      127      126      126      127

Description I used the quantiles as the break points in the new crime categorical variable. This new variable has the following categories: low, med_low, med_high, high. The old crime rate variable is now dropped from the dataset.

4.3 Dividing the dataset to train and test sets, so that 80% of the data belongs to the train set

Task 5

5.1 Fitting the linear discriminant analysis on the train set by using the categorical crime rate as the target variable and all the other variables in the dataset as predictor variables.

## Call:
## lda(crime ~ ., data = train)
## 
## Prior probabilities of groups:
##       low   med_low  med_high      high 
## 0.2227723 0.2722772 0.2425743 0.2623762 
## 
## Group means:
##                   zn      indus        chas        nox          rm
## low       1.04704668 -0.8787045 -0.09734683 -0.8884709  0.40473923
## med_low  -0.09199095 -0.2796114 -0.05757815 -0.5631767 -0.13784544
## med_high -0.37173443  0.1800432  0.20976484  0.3922049  0.06498778
## high     -0.48724019  1.0170298 -0.01233188  1.0533492 -0.38428085
##                 age        dis        rad        tax     ptratio
## low      -0.8394818  0.9356588 -0.6934784 -0.7320738 -0.51783712
## med_low  -0.3680236  0.3163312 -0.5527622 -0.4505124 -0.07520112
## med_high  0.3889162 -0.3535144 -0.4041220 -0.2892987 -0.30185184
## high      0.8083240 -0.8565108  1.6390172  1.5146914  0.78181164
##                black       lstat         medv
## low       0.37093569 -0.73922357  0.480280927
## med_low   0.31752424 -0.17049535 -0.006532388
## med_high  0.07478961  0.03902381  0.174838730
## high     -0.68363983  0.85375936 -0.669896541
## 
## Coefficients of linear discriminants:
##                  LD1           LD2         LD3
## zn       0.139409527  0.8800816797 -0.97683565
## indus    0.025167820 -0.0816779181  0.03896636
## chas    -0.003321766 -0.0408519038  0.05381218
## nox      0.460938597 -0.7529709833 -1.35302376
## rm       0.028766722 -0.0518005972 -0.17569388
## age      0.236578080 -0.0814869826 -0.35421863
## dis     -0.043827086 -0.1916609414 -0.14683940
## rad      3.276054739  1.0202911026 -0.23574745
## tax     -0.119406820 -0.2000674347  0.89051409
## ptratio  0.161191541 -0.0002976277 -0.26810131
## black   -0.103927911  0.0344339502  0.11931968
## lstat    0.200052465 -0.3044146566  0.21412586
## medv     0.102332355 -0.4563299175 -0.30048359
## 
## Proportion of trace:
##    LD1    LD2    LD3 
## 0.9506 0.0355 0.0139

5.2 Drawing the LDA (bi)plot.

Description 5.1 First we’ll see prior probabilities of groups of our new crime variable. For example prior probability of category high is 0.2425743.

Next we’ll see the means of our scaled variables in the four crime categories. For example mean of the zn in the category low is 0.96775094.

Then we’ll see coefficients of linear discriminants output which provides the linear combination of predictor variables that are used to form the LDA decision rule. For example LD1 for medv is 0.18357863.

In the last section we’ll see proportion of trace which is the proportion of crime categories that is explained by successive discriminant functions. As we can see the LD1 has highest proportion of trace.

5.2 From the graph we can see that correlation between rad zn and zn nox is pretty low. As we know already from the task 3 those correlations are : rad zn -0.31 zn nox -0.52 Also we can see that variable rad is the feature contributing to LD1 dimension.

Task 6

6.1 Saving the crime categories from the test set and then removing the categorical crime variable from the test dataset.

6.2 Predicting the classes with the LDA model on the test data. Then cross tabulating the results with the crime categories from the test set.

##           predicted
## correct    low med_low med_high high
##   low       18      17        2    0
##   med_low    1      13        2    0
##   med_high   0       8       19    1
##   high       0       0        0   21

Describtion Here we can see that the prediction of the classes is correct in: low 61% of cases med_low41% of cases med_high78% of cases high100% of cases

Task 7

7.1 Reloading the Boston dataset and standardizing the dataset

library(MASS)
data("Boston")
boston_scaled <- scale(Boston)
summary(boston_scaled)
##       crim                 zn               indus        
##  Min.   :-0.419367   Min.   :-0.48724   Min.   :-1.5563  
##  1st Qu.:-0.410563   1st Qu.:-0.48724   1st Qu.:-0.8668  
##  Median :-0.390280   Median :-0.48724   Median :-0.2109  
##  Mean   : 0.000000   Mean   : 0.00000   Mean   : 0.0000  
##  3rd Qu.: 0.007389   3rd Qu.: 0.04872   3rd Qu.: 1.0150  
##  Max.   : 9.924110   Max.   : 3.80047   Max.   : 2.4202  
##       chas              nox                rm               age         
##  Min.   :-0.2723   Min.   :-1.4644   Min.   :-3.8764   Min.   :-2.3331  
##  1st Qu.:-0.2723   1st Qu.:-0.9121   1st Qu.:-0.5681   1st Qu.:-0.8366  
##  Median :-0.2723   Median :-0.1441   Median :-0.1084   Median : 0.3171  
##  Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000  
##  3rd Qu.:-0.2723   3rd Qu.: 0.5981   3rd Qu.: 0.4823   3rd Qu.: 0.9059  
##  Max.   : 3.6648   Max.   : 2.7296   Max.   : 3.5515   Max.   : 1.1164  
##       dis               rad               tax             ptratio       
##  Min.   :-1.2658   Min.   :-0.9819   Min.   :-1.3127   Min.   :-2.7047  
##  1st Qu.:-0.8049   1st Qu.:-0.6373   1st Qu.:-0.7668   1st Qu.:-0.4876  
##  Median :-0.2790   Median :-0.5225   Median :-0.4642   Median : 0.2746  
##  Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000  
##  3rd Qu.: 0.6617   3rd Qu.: 1.6596   3rd Qu.: 1.5294   3rd Qu.: 0.8058  
##  Max.   : 3.9566   Max.   : 1.6596   Max.   : 1.7964   Max.   : 1.6372  
##      black             lstat              medv        
##  Min.   :-3.9033   Min.   :-1.5296   Min.   :-1.9063  
##  1st Qu.: 0.2049   1st Qu.:-0.7986   1st Qu.:-0.5989  
##  Median : 0.3808   Median :-0.1811   Median :-0.1449  
##  Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000   Mean   : 0.0000  
##  3rd Qu.: 0.4332   3rd Qu.: 0.6024   3rd Qu.: 0.2683  
##  Max.   : 0.4406   Max.   : 3.5453   Max.   : 2.9865
class(boston_scaled)
## [1] "matrix"
boston_scaled <- as.data.frame(boston_scaled)

7.2 Distances between the observations

##    Min. 1st Qu.  Median    Mean 3rd Qu.    Max. 
##  0.1343  3.4625  4.8241  4.9111  6.1863 14.3970
##    Min. 1st Qu.  Median    Mean 3rd Qu.    Max. 
##  0.2662  8.4832 12.6090 13.5488 17.7568 48.8618

Description Distance between the observations calculated with two different methods: Euclidian distances (Ordinary" straight-line distance between two points in Euclidean space) and Manhattan distances(The distance between two points measured along axes at right angles). This case Euclidian distance mean is 4.9111 and median 4.8241 and Manhattan distance mean is 13.5488 and median 12.6090.

7.3 Runing k-means algorithm on the dataset and visualizing the cluster.

Description For investigating what is the optimal number of clusters I will use the elbow method:

  1. Compute clustering algorithm (e.g., k-means clustering) for different values of k. For instance, by varying k from 1 to 10 clusters
  2. For each k, calculate the total within-cluster sum of square (wss)
  3. Plot the curve of wss according to the number of clusters k.
  4. The location of a bend (knee) in the plot is generally considered as an indicator of the appropriate number of clusters.

I will say that optimal number of clusters in this case is 2.

7.4 Running the algorithm again and visualizing the cluster.

Description The graph shows us that which combinations of two variables distinguish the two clusters. For example tax agedistinguish the two clusters quite well also taxwith many other variables distinguish the two clusters quite well.

Exercise 5 / Dimensionality reduction techniques

Datawrangling

Datawrangling part1 / last weeks exercise

Code for last weeks datawrangling is here: https://github.com/elmeris/IODS-project/blob/master/data/human.R

The data is combination of Human Development Index (HDI) data and Gender Inequality Index (GII) data. Data is collected by United Nations Development Programme.

The Human Development Index (HDI) is a summary measure of average achievement in key dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life, being knowledgeable and have a decent standard of living. More info about HDI here: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi

The GII is an inequality index. It measures gender inequalities in three important aspects of human development—reproductive health, measured by maternal mortality ratio and adolescent birth rates; empowerment, measured by proportion of parliamentary seats occupied by females and proportion of adult females and males aged 25 years and older with at least some secondary education; and economic status, expressed as labour market participation and measured by labour force participation rate of female and male populations aged 15 years and older. More info about GII here: http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/gender-inequality-index-gii

Data has now 195 observations with 19 variables. There are also two new variables “Edu2.FM” and “Labo.FM”.

I have renamed the variables with (shorter) descriptive names:

VARIABLE NAME
"HDI.Rank" —
"Country" —
"Human.Development.Index..HDI." "HDI"
"Life.Expectancy.at.Birth" "Life.Exp"
"Expected.Years.of.Education" "Edu.Exp"
"Mean.Years.of.Education" "Edu.Mean"
"Gross.National.Income..GNI..per.Capita" "GNI"
"GNI.per.Capita.Rank.Minus.HDI.Rank" "GNI.Minus.Rank"
"GII.Rank" —
"Gender.Inequality.Index..GII." "GII"
"Maternal.Mortality.Ratio" "Mat.Mor"
"Adolescent.Birth.Rate" "Ado.Birth"
"Percent.Representation.in.Parliament" "Parli.F"
"Population.with.Secondary.Education..Female." ""Edu2.F""
"Population.with.Secondary.Education..Male." "Edu2.M"
"Labour.Force.Participation.Rate..Female." "Labo.F"
"Labour.Force.Participation.Rate..Male." "Labo.M"
"The ratio of Female and Male populations with secondary education in each country" "Edu2.FM"
"the ratio of labour force participation of females and males in each country " "Labo.FM"

Datawrangling part2 / datawrangling continues

Code for this week datawrangling is here: https://github.com/elmeris/IODS-project/blob/master/data/human2.R

Please review my datawrangling exercise for this week from link above. The data have now 155 observations and 8 variables as it should.

Analysis

I think my datawrangling was successful. However, for the sake of certainty, I will upload wrangled data for this exercise. I will name this data human3.

human3 <- read.table("http://s3.amazonaws.com/assets.datacamp.com/production/course_2218/datasets/human2.txt", sep  =",", header = T)
str(human3)
## 'data.frame':    155 obs. of  8 variables:
##  $ Edu2.FM  : num  1.007 0.997 0.983 0.989 0.969 ...
##  $ Labo.FM  : num  0.891 0.819 0.825 0.884 0.829 ...
##  $ Edu.Exp  : num  17.5 20.2 15.8 18.7 17.9 16.5 18.6 16.5 15.9 19.2 ...
##  $ Life.Exp : num  81.6 82.4 83 80.2 81.6 80.9 80.9 79.1 82 81.8 ...
##  $ GNI      : int  64992 42261 56431 44025 45435 43919 39568 52947 42155 32689 ...
##  $ Mat.Mor  : int  4 6 6 5 6 7 9 28 11 8 ...
##  $ Ado.Birth: num  7.8 12.1 1.9 5.1 6.2 3.8 8.2 31 14.5 25.3 ...
##  $ Parli.F  : num  39.6 30.5 28.5 38 36.9 36.9 19.9 19.4 28.2 31.4 ...

Looks as it should.

Task 1 / A graphical overview of the data and summaries of the variables in the data

library(MASS)
library(tidyr)
library(stringr)
library(ggplot2)
library(GGally)
library(corrplot)
library(tidyverse)
## ── Attaching packages ─────────────────────────────────────────────── tidyverse 1.3.0 ──
## ✔ tibble  2.1.3     ✔ purrr   0.3.3
## ✔ readr   1.3.1     ✔ forcats 0.4.0
## ── Conflicts ────────────────────────────────────────────────── tidyverse_conflicts() ──
## ✖ dplyr::filter() masks stats::filter()
## ✖ dplyr::lag()    masks stats::lag()
## ✖ MASS::select()  masks dplyr::select()
ggpairs(human3)

cor(human3) %>% corrplot

summary(human3)
##     Edu2.FM          Labo.FM          Edu.Exp         Life.Exp    
##  Min.   :0.1717   Min.   :0.1857   Min.   : 5.40   Min.   :49.00  
##  1st Qu.:0.7264   1st Qu.:0.5984   1st Qu.:11.25   1st Qu.:66.30  
##  Median :0.9375   Median :0.7535   Median :13.50   Median :74.20  
##  Mean   :0.8529   Mean   :0.7074   Mean   :13.18   Mean   :71.65  
##  3rd Qu.:0.9968   3rd Qu.:0.8535   3rd Qu.:15.20   3rd Qu.:77.25  
##  Max.   :1.4967   Max.   :1.0380   Max.   :20.20   Max.   :83.50  
##       GNI            Mat.Mor         Ado.Birth         Parli.F     
##  Min.   :   581   Min.   :   1.0   Min.   :  0.60   Min.   : 0.00  
##  1st Qu.:  4198   1st Qu.:  11.5   1st Qu.: 12.65   1st Qu.:12.40  
##  Median : 12040   Median :  49.0   Median : 33.60   Median :19.30  
##  Mean   : 17628   Mean   : 149.1   Mean   : 47.16   Mean   :20.91  
##  3rd Qu.: 24512   3rd Qu.: 190.0   3rd Qu.: 71.95   3rd Qu.:27.95  
##  Max.   :123124   Max.   :1100.0   Max.   :204.80   Max.   :57.50

Describtion Graphs and correlation matrix visualization shows us correlations between the variables. For example: The strongest correlations are between: - expected years of education and life expectancy - maternal mortality ratio and adolescent birth rate The strongest negative correlations are between: - maternal mortality ratio and life expectancy - life expectancy and adolescent birth rate Summaries are shown in the table above.

Task 2 / Principal component analysis (PCA) on the not standardized human data. Variability captured by the principal components. Biplot displaying the observations by the first two principal components (PC1 coordinate in x-axis, PC2 coordinate in y-axis), along with arrows representing the original variables.

pca_human1 <- prcomp(human3)
biplot(pca_human1, choices = 1:2, cex = c(0.8, 1), col = c("grey40", "deeppink2"))
## Warning in arrows(0, 0, y[, 1L] * 0.8, y[, 2L] * 0.8, col = col[2L], length
## = arrow.len): zero-length arrow is of indeterminate angle and so skipped

## Warning in arrows(0, 0, y[, 1L] * 0.8, y[, 2L] * 0.8, col = col[2L], length
## = arrow.len): zero-length arrow is of indeterminate angle and so skipped

## Warning in arrows(0, 0, y[, 1L] * 0.8, y[, 2L] * 0.8, col = col[2L], length
## = arrow.len): zero-length arrow is of indeterminate angle and so skipped

## Warning in arrows(0, 0, y[, 1L] * 0.8, y[, 2L] * 0.8, col = col[2L], length
## = arrow.len): zero-length arrow is of indeterminate angle and so skipped

## Warning in arrows(0, 0, y[, 1L] * 0.8, y[, 2L] * 0.8, col = col[2L], length
## = arrow.len): zero-length arrow is of indeterminate angle and so skipped

s<-summary(pca_human1)
s
## Importance of components:
##                              PC1      PC2   PC3   PC4   PC5   PC6    PC7
## Standard deviation     1.854e+04 185.5219 25.19 11.45 3.766 1.566 0.1912
## Proportion of Variance 9.999e-01   0.0001  0.00  0.00 0.000 0.000 0.0000
## Cumulative Proportion  9.999e-01   1.0000  1.00  1.00 1.000 1.000 1.0000
##                           PC8
## Standard deviation     0.1591
## Proportion of Variance 0.0000
## Cumulative Proportion  1.0000
pca_pr_nonst <- round(100*s$importance[2,], digits = 1)
pc_lab_nonst <- paste0(names(pca_pr_nonst), " (", pca_pr_nonst, "%)")
biplot(pca_human1, cex = c(0.8, 1), col = c("grey40", "deeppink2"), xlab = pc_lab_nonst[1], ylab = pc_lab_nonst[2])
## Warning in arrows(0, 0, y[, 1L] * 0.8, y[, 2L] * 0.8, col = col[2L], length
## = arrow.len): zero-length arrow is of indeterminate angle and so skipped

## Warning in arrows(0, 0, y[, 1L] * 0.8, y[, 2L] * 0.8, col = col[2L], length
## = arrow.len): zero-length arrow is of indeterminate angle and so skipped

## Warning in arrows(0, 0, y[, 1L] * 0.8, y[, 2L] * 0.8, col = col[2L], length
## = arrow.len): zero-length arrow is of indeterminate angle and so skipped

## Warning in arrows(0, 0, y[, 1L] * 0.8, y[, 2L] * 0.8, col = col[2L], length
## = arrow.len): zero-length arrow is of indeterminate angle and so skipped

## Warning in arrows(0, 0, y[, 1L] * 0.8, y[, 2L] * 0.8, col = col[2L], length
## = arrow.len): zero-length arrow is of indeterminate angle and so skipped

Task 3,4 / Standardizing the variables in the human data and repeat the above analysis.

human_std <- scale(human3)
pca_human2 <- prcomp(human_std)
s<-summary(pca_human2)
s
## Importance of components:
##                           PC1    PC2     PC3     PC4     PC5     PC6
## Standard deviation     2.0708 1.1397 0.87505 0.77886 0.66196 0.53631
## Proportion of Variance 0.5361 0.1624 0.09571 0.07583 0.05477 0.03595
## Cumulative Proportion  0.5361 0.6984 0.79413 0.86996 0.92473 0.96069
##                            PC7     PC8
## Standard deviation     0.45900 0.32224
## Proportion of Variance 0.02634 0.01298
## Cumulative Proportion  0.98702 1.00000
pca_pr <- round(100*s$importance[2,], digits = 1)
pc_lab <- paste0(names(pca_pr), " (", pca_pr, "%)")
biplot(pca_human2, cex = c(0.8, 1), col = c("grey40", "deeppink2"), xlab = pc_lab[1], ylab = pc_lab[2])

pca_human2
## Standard deviations (1, .., p=8):
## [1] 2.0708380 1.1397204 0.8750485 0.7788630 0.6619563 0.5363061 0.4589994
## [8] 0.3222406
## 
## Rotation (n x k) = (8 x 8):
##                   PC1         PC2         PC3         PC4        PC5
## Edu2.FM   -0.35664370  0.03796058 -0.24223089  0.62678110 -0.5983585
## Labo.FM    0.05457785  0.72432726 -0.58428770  0.06199424  0.2625067
## Edu.Exp   -0.42766720  0.13940571 -0.07340270 -0.07020294  0.1659678
## Life.Exp  -0.44372240 -0.02530473  0.10991305 -0.05834819  0.1628935
## GNI       -0.35048295  0.05060876 -0.20168779 -0.72727675 -0.4950306
## Mat.Mor    0.43697098  0.14508727 -0.12522539 -0.25170614 -0.1800657
## Ado.Birth  0.41126010  0.07708468  0.01968243  0.04986763 -0.4672068
## Parli.F   -0.08438558  0.65136866  0.72506309  0.01396293 -0.1523699
##                   PC6         PC7         PC8
## Edu2.FM    0.17713316  0.05773644  0.16459453
## Labo.FM   -0.03500707 -0.22729927 -0.07304568
## Edu.Exp   -0.38606919  0.77962966 -0.05415984
## Life.Exp  -0.42242796 -0.43406432  0.62737008
## GNI        0.11120305 -0.13711838 -0.16961173
## Mat.Mor    0.17370039  0.35380306  0.72193946
## Ado.Birth -0.76056557 -0.06897064 -0.14335186
## Parli.F    0.13749772  0.00568387 -0.02306476

Describtion(task2/3/4)

In principal component analysis (PCA) on the not standardized human data it seems that GNI has the biggest variance. PC1 captures all the variance.

After standardisation PCA looks much better. Now it seems that GNI is not the only variable that stands out.

The results are different because PCA assumes that the variables with higher variance are more important for those with lower variance.

Now we can interpret results of PCA.

  • There is a small angle between Maternal mortality ratio and Adolescent Birth Rate point meaning they are correlated positively. Thease variables are strongly contribute to PC1. i.e. in the countries where maternal mortality ratio is high also adolescent birth rate is high.

  • There is a small angle between Female Labour Force Participation Rate and Percent Female Representation in Parliament meaning they are correlated positively with each other but negatively correlated with Female Population with Secondary Education, Gross National Income per Capita, Expected Years of Education and Life Expectancy at Birth. Thease variables are strongly contribute to PC2. i.e. in the countries where females are in the parliament they are active in labour force also.

  • There is a small angle between Female Population with Secondary Education, Gross National Income per Capita, Expected Years of Education and Life Expectancy at Birth meaning they are correlated positively with each other but and negatively correlated with maternal mortality ratio and adolescent birth rate. Thease variables are contributing negatively to PC1. i.e. in the countries where women have secondary education also GNI is higher, and expect years of education is higher and life expectancy is higher.

PC1: Most meaning full components are life expectancy and maternal mortality. These arrows goes other direction. i.e. in the countries where maternal mortality ratio is high the life life expectancy is low.

PC2: Most meaning full components are Female Labour Force Participation Rate and Percent Female Representation in Parliament. These arrows goes same direction. i.e. in the countries where females are in the parliament they are active in labour force also.

Task 5 / Tea time!

library(FactoMineR)
data("tea")
str(tea)
## 'data.frame':    300 obs. of  36 variables:
##  $ breakfast       : Factor w/ 2 levels "breakfast","Not.breakfast": 1 1 2 2 1 2 1 2 1 1 ...
##  $ tea.time        : Factor w/ 2 levels "Not.tea time",..: 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 ...
##  $ evening         : Factor w/ 2 levels "evening","Not.evening": 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 ...
##  $ lunch           : Factor w/ 2 levels "lunch","Not.lunch": 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ...
##  $ dinner          : Factor w/ 2 levels "dinner","Not.dinner": 2 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 ...
##  $ always          : Factor w/ 2 levels "always","Not.always": 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 ...
##  $ home            : Factor w/ 2 levels "home","Not.home": 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
##  $ work            : Factor w/ 2 levels "Not.work","work": 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
##  $ tearoom         : Factor w/ 2 levels "Not.tearoom",..: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 ...
##  $ friends         : Factor w/ 2 levels "friends","Not.friends": 2 2 1 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 ...
##  $ resto           : Factor w/ 2 levels "Not.resto","resto": 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
##  $ pub             : Factor w/ 2 levels "Not.pub","pub": 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
##  $ Tea             : Factor w/ 3 levels "black","Earl Grey",..: 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 ...
##  $ How             : Factor w/ 4 levels "alone","lemon",..: 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 ...
##  $ sugar           : Factor w/ 2 levels "No.sugar","sugar": 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
##  $ how             : Factor w/ 3 levels "tea bag","tea bag+unpackaged",..: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 ...
##  $ where           : Factor w/ 3 levels "chain store",..: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 ...
##  $ price           : Factor w/ 6 levels "p_branded","p_cheap",..: 4 6 6 6 6 3 6 6 5 5 ...
##  $ age             : int  39 45 47 23 48 21 37 36 40 37 ...
##  $ sex             : Factor w/ 2 levels "F","M": 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 ...
##  $ SPC             : Factor w/ 7 levels "employee","middle",..: 2 2 4 6 1 6 5 2 5 5 ...
##  $ Sport           : Factor w/ 2 levels "Not.sportsman",..: 2 2 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 ...
##  $ age_Q           : Factor w/ 5 levels "15-24","25-34",..: 3 4 4 1 4 1 3 3 3 3 ...
##  $ frequency       : Factor w/ 4 levels "1/day","1 to 2/week",..: 1 1 3 1 3 1 4 2 3 3 ...
##  $ escape.exoticism: Factor w/ 2 levels "escape-exoticism",..: 2 1 2 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 ...
##  $ spirituality    : Factor w/ 2 levels "Not.spirituality",..: 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 1 1 ...
##  $ healthy         : Factor w/ 2 levels "healthy","Not.healthy": 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 ...
##  $ diuretic        : Factor w/ 2 levels "diuretic","Not.diuretic": 2 1 1 2 1 2 2 2 2 1 ...
##  $ friendliness    : Factor w/ 2 levels "friendliness",..: 2 2 1 2 1 2 2 1 2 1 ...
##  $ iron.absorption : Factor w/ 2 levels "iron absorption",..: 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ...
##  $ feminine        : Factor w/ 2 levels "feminine","Not.feminine": 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 2 ...
##  $ sophisticated   : Factor w/ 2 levels "Not.sophisticated",..: 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 2 1 ...
##  $ slimming        : Factor w/ 2 levels "No.slimming",..: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
##  $ exciting        : Factor w/ 2 levels "exciting","No.exciting": 2 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ...
##  $ relaxing        : Factor w/ 2 levels "No.relaxing",..: 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ...
##  $ effect.on.health: Factor w/ 2 levels "effect on health",..: 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ...
dim(tea)
## [1] 300  36
summary(tea)
##          breakfast           tea.time          evening          lunch    
##  breakfast    :144   Not.tea time:131   evening    :103   lunch    : 44  
##  Not.breakfast:156   tea time    :169   Not.evening:197   Not.lunch:256  
##                                                                          
##                                                                          
##                                                                          
##                                                                          
##                                                                          
##         dinner           always          home           work    
##  dinner    : 21   always    :103   home    :291   Not.work:213  
##  Not.dinner:279   Not.always:197   Not.home:  9   work    : 87  
##                                                                 
##                                                                 
##                                                                 
##                                                                 
##                                                                 
##         tearoom           friends          resto          pub     
##  Not.tearoom:242   friends    :196   Not.resto:221   Not.pub:237  
##  tearoom    : 58   Not.friends:104   resto    : 79   pub    : 63  
##                                                                   
##                                                                   
##                                                                   
##                                                                   
##                                                                   
##         Tea         How           sugar                     how     
##  black    : 74   alone:195   No.sugar:155   tea bag           :170  
##  Earl Grey:193   lemon: 33   sugar   :145   tea bag+unpackaged: 94  
##  green    : 33   milk : 63                  unpackaged        : 36  
##                  other:  9                                          
##                                                                     
##                                                                     
##                                                                     
##                   where                 price          age        sex    
##  chain store         :192   p_branded      : 95   Min.   :15.00   F:178  
##  chain store+tea shop: 78   p_cheap        :  7   1st Qu.:23.00   M:122  
##  tea shop            : 30   p_private label: 21   Median :32.00          
##                             p_unknown      : 12   Mean   :37.05          
##                             p_upscale      : 53   3rd Qu.:48.00          
##                             p_variable     :112   Max.   :90.00          
##                                                                          
##            SPC               Sport       age_Q          frequency  
##  employee    :59   Not.sportsman:121   15-24:92   1/day      : 95  
##  middle      :40   sportsman    :179   25-34:69   1 to 2/week: 44  
##  non-worker  :64                       35-44:40   +2/day     :127  
##  other worker:20                       45-59:61   3 to 6/week: 34  
##  senior      :35                       +60  :38                    
##  student     :70                                                   
##  workman     :12                                                   
##              escape.exoticism           spirituality        healthy   
##  escape-exoticism    :142     Not.spirituality:206   healthy    :210  
##  Not.escape-exoticism:158     spirituality    : 94   Not.healthy: 90  
##                                                                       
##                                                                       
##                                                                       
##                                                                       
##                                                                       
##          diuretic             friendliness            iron.absorption
##  diuretic    :174   friendliness    :242   iron absorption    : 31   
##  Not.diuretic:126   Not.friendliness: 58   Not.iron absorption:269   
##                                                                      
##                                                                      
##                                                                      
##                                                                      
##                                                                      
##          feminine             sophisticated        slimming  
##  feminine    :129   Not.sophisticated: 85   No.slimming:255  
##  Not.feminine:171   sophisticated    :215   slimming   : 45  
##                                                              
##                                                              
##                                                              
##                                                              
##                                                              
##         exciting          relaxing              effect.on.health
##  exciting   :116   No.relaxing:113   effect on health   : 66    
##  No.exciting:184   relaxing   :187   No.effect on health:234    
##                                                                 
##                                                                 
##                                                                 
##                                                                 
##

Describtion Data has 300 onservations and 36 variables. The data used here concern a questionnaire on tea. We asked to 300 individuals how they drink tea (18 questions), what are their product’s perception (12 questions) and some personal details (4 questions). Rows represent the individuals, columns represent the different questions. The first 18 questions are active ones, the 19th is a supplementary quantitative variable (the age) and the last variables are supplementary categorical variables.

keep_columns <- c("Tea", "How", "how", "sugar", "where", "lunch")
tea_time <- dplyr::select(tea, one_of(keep_columns))
summary(tea_time)
##         Tea         How                      how           sugar    
##  black    : 74   alone:195   tea bag           :170   No.sugar:155  
##  Earl Grey:193   lemon: 33   tea bag+unpackaged: 94   sugar   :145  
##  green    : 33   milk : 63   unpackaged        : 36                 
##                  other:  9                                          
##                   where           lunch    
##  chain store         :192   lunch    : 44  
##  chain store+tea shop: 78   Not.lunch:256  
##  tea shop            : 30                  
## 
str(tea_time)
## 'data.frame':    300 obs. of  6 variables:
##  $ Tea  : Factor w/ 3 levels "black","Earl Grey",..: 1 1 2 2 2 2 2 1 2 1 ...
##  $ How  : Factor w/ 4 levels "alone","lemon",..: 1 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 3 1 ...
##  $ how  : Factor w/ 3 levels "tea bag","tea bag+unpackaged",..: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 ...
##  $ sugar: Factor w/ 2 levels "No.sugar","sugar": 2 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 1 1 ...
##  $ where: Factor w/ 3 levels "chain store",..: 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 2 ...
##  $ lunch: Factor w/ 2 levels "lunch","Not.lunch": 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 ...
dim(tea_time)
## [1] 300   6
gather(tea_time) %>% ggplot(aes(value)) + facet_wrap("key", scales = "free") + geom_bar() + theme(axis.text.x = element_text(angle = 45, hjust = 1, size = 8))
## Warning: attributes are not identical across measure variables;
## they will be dropped

Describtion Now the data has 300 onservations and 6 variables. Graphs shows - most individuals drinks tea in bag form - most individuals tee alone - most individuals do not drink in lunch time - there is not so big difference between individuals who uses sugar and who doesnt - most individuals drinks Earl Grey - most individuals drink in the chain store

mca <- MCA(tea_time, graph = FALSE)
summary(mca)
## 
## Call:
## MCA(X = tea_time, graph = FALSE) 
## 
## 
## Eigenvalues
##                        Dim.1   Dim.2   Dim.3   Dim.4   Dim.5   Dim.6
## Variance               0.279   0.261   0.219   0.189   0.177   0.156
## % of var.             15.238  14.232  11.964  10.333   9.667   8.519
## Cumulative % of var.  15.238  29.471  41.435  51.768  61.434  69.953
##                        Dim.7   Dim.8   Dim.9  Dim.10  Dim.11
## Variance               0.144   0.141   0.117   0.087   0.062
## % of var.              7.841   7.705   6.392   4.724   3.385
## Cumulative % of var.  77.794  85.500  91.891  96.615 100.000
## 
## Individuals (the 10 first)
##                       Dim.1    ctr   cos2    Dim.2    ctr   cos2    Dim.3
## 1                  | -0.298  0.106  0.086 | -0.328  0.137  0.105 | -0.327
## 2                  | -0.237  0.067  0.036 | -0.136  0.024  0.012 | -0.695
## 3                  | -0.369  0.162  0.231 | -0.300  0.115  0.153 | -0.202
## 4                  | -0.530  0.335  0.460 | -0.318  0.129  0.166 |  0.211
## 5                  | -0.369  0.162  0.231 | -0.300  0.115  0.153 | -0.202
## 6                  | -0.369  0.162  0.231 | -0.300  0.115  0.153 | -0.202
## 7                  | -0.369  0.162  0.231 | -0.300  0.115  0.153 | -0.202
## 8                  | -0.237  0.067  0.036 | -0.136  0.024  0.012 | -0.695
## 9                  |  0.143  0.024  0.012 |  0.871  0.969  0.435 | -0.067
## 10                 |  0.476  0.271  0.140 |  0.687  0.604  0.291 | -0.650
##                       ctr   cos2  
## 1                   0.163  0.104 |
## 2                   0.735  0.314 |
## 3                   0.062  0.069 |
## 4                   0.068  0.073 |
## 5                   0.062  0.069 |
## 6                   0.062  0.069 |
## 7                   0.062  0.069 |
## 8                   0.735  0.314 |
## 9                   0.007  0.003 |
## 10                  0.643  0.261 |
## 
## Categories (the 10 first)
##                        Dim.1     ctr    cos2  v.test     Dim.2     ctr
## black              |   0.473   3.288   0.073   4.677 |   0.094   0.139
## Earl Grey          |  -0.264   2.680   0.126  -6.137 |   0.123   0.626
## green              |   0.486   1.547   0.029   2.952 |  -0.933   6.111
## alone              |  -0.018   0.012   0.001  -0.418 |  -0.262   2.841
## lemon              |   0.669   2.938   0.055   4.068 |   0.531   1.979
## milk               |  -0.337   1.420   0.030  -3.002 |   0.272   0.990
## other              |   0.288   0.148   0.003   0.876 |   1.820   6.347
## tea bag            |  -0.608  12.499   0.483 -12.023 |  -0.351   4.459
## tea bag+unpackaged |   0.350   2.289   0.056   4.088 |   1.024  20.968
## unpackaged         |   1.958  27.432   0.523  12.499 |  -1.015   7.898
##                       cos2  v.test     Dim.3     ctr    cos2  v.test  
## black                0.003   0.929 |  -1.081  21.888   0.382 -10.692 |
## Earl Grey            0.027   2.867 |   0.433   9.160   0.338  10.053 |
## green                0.107  -5.669 |  -0.108   0.098   0.001  -0.659 |
## alone                0.127  -6.164 |  -0.113   0.627   0.024  -2.655 |
## lemon                0.035   3.226 |   1.329  14.771   0.218   8.081 |
## milk                 0.020   2.422 |   0.013   0.003   0.000   0.116 |
## other                0.102   5.534 |  -2.524  14.526   0.197  -7.676 |
## tea bag              0.161  -6.941 |  -0.065   0.183   0.006  -1.287 |
## tea bag+unpackaged   0.478  11.956 |   0.019   0.009   0.000   0.226 |
## unpackaged           0.141  -6.482 |   0.257   0.602   0.009   1.640 |
## 
## Categorical variables (eta2)
##                      Dim.1 Dim.2 Dim.3  
## Tea                | 0.126 0.108 0.410 |
## How                | 0.076 0.190 0.394 |
## how                | 0.708 0.522 0.010 |
## sugar              | 0.065 0.001 0.336 |
## where              | 0.702 0.681 0.055 |
## lunch              | 0.000 0.064 0.111 |
plot(mca, invisible=c("ind"), habillage = "quali")

Describtion First part (Eigenvalues) there is the proportion of the data variance explained by each 11 dimension. Dim 1: explains 15% of the varaince, Dim 2: 14%, Dim 3: 12%, and so on…

Second part (Categories (the 10 first)) there is the information about the contribution of the 10 first individuals to the first three dimensions.

Third part (the categorical variables) there is the squared correlation between each variable and the dimensions.

Biplot: - Variables like: other, chain store+tea shop, tea bag+unpackaged, lunch, lemon, green, unpackaged, tea shop are contributed to the Dim 2. - Variables like: black, tea bag, chain store are contributing negatively to Dim 1.